I am glad to see the Catholic Bishops make some of the modern understanding of the bible more available to the Catholic laity, it is just a shame that poor use of language in this article will lead to much misconception. The thesis put forward by the Bishops in this document will be nothing new to many Catholics and other Christians alike. Far from the Catholic Church suggesting it can pick and choose what it decides is "true" in the Bible, it simply shows how reasonable the Christian faith is, and shows how modern methods of literary criticism can be used to help us explore the Truth expounded by the Bible. The Bishops are trying to draw peoples attention to the Truth by helping people understand the Bible, and that understanding is greatly aided once you abolish the fundamentalist barrier of having to accept everything written in the Bible as being in the factual/historical genre which much of the bible was simply not written in.
James Potter, Kingston-upon-ThamesI am very glad to see that the Catholic Church is driving another nail in its own coffin by undermining its faith in the divine and infallible nature of the Bible. This is yet another sign that religion has had its day, and that something better needs to take its place. In downgrading the Bible, Catholic Church is recognising that good sense is better than blind faith. As much of religion makes very little sense to anyone, it is time we saw the back of it. Alistair Sinclair, Glasgow
As a former journalist now working as an Anglican minister, and with a robust evangelical theology, I am surprised that the latest Roman Catholic report is regarded as news. To believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, as I do, in no way requires a literalistic interpretation of every verse: it all depends, as the catholic bishops rightly say, what sort of literature it is - poetry, letter, history or whatever. When the Psalms speak of Lebanon "skipping like a calf" we recognise it as a figure of speech. Likewise, it seems to me that the early chapters of Genesis, taken in their own context, require a non-literalistic interpretation - how else can the Bible speak of evening and morning before it speaks of the creation of the sun? The ancient writers were not fools and we should not demand of the text what it does not even demand of itself. Rev David Baker, Surbiton
Truly shocking. How dare these characters who have the affront to call themselves cardinals and bishops alter the word of God just to appease an anti-Christian PC brigade. Cowards and charlatans the lot of them. Which part of the Bible is true then? At a time when anti-Christian forces are amassing in Hollywood in the production of The Da Vinci Code, the last message Catholics want to hear is that the Bible is not true. If the authors of this report have any dignity at all they should resign there positions asap. Gregory Syle, London
I think this is a huge step forward ;the church catching up with many people who perhaps for centuries have been concerned about how the words of the Bible have been used to support violent acts and dangerous intolerance against those who don't hold the same beliefs. Hopefully once people understand the intent of this declaration,more tolerance and compassionate spiritual beliefs will flower in Christianity as well as other world religions. In time people may learn that each of us already knows the truth in our own hearts and don't need the words of others to be spiritual beings. Frances Ross, Vancouver, Canada
I agree that different genres of literature are present in the Bible, such as poetry, prophecy, genealogy, history, allegory, and such. However I am convinced that the first chapters of the Bible were clearly intended by its writers to be understood as history and not myth or allegory, something much easier to argue than whether that history is fact. It is patently obvious that the real reason scholars are labeling it myth is because they do not believe it is true, not on the strength of proper textual criticism. Many evangelicals and fundamentalists (such as myself) accept it as true history; many atheists or followers of other religions accept it as a false history, but a history nonetheless. The whole business strikes me as dishonest fence straddling. Face it, how can you possibly reconcile the idea that human death came about as the result of sin entering a perfect world with the imperfect world built from death and brutal trial and error posited by the theory of evolution? The Catholic Church may be trying to save some precious doctrines and do some PR by jettisoning those embarrassing early chapters, but their whole system unravels without the essential foundation provided by Genesis. Paul Chernoch, Stoneham, MA, USA
Is there a way out of this Biblical impasse and morass? Either you are one of those extremists who say the Bible is historical and should be interpreted literally or one who says the Bible should be banned and cannot be taken seriously. Or you try, like these Roman Catholic bishops did, to find a middle-ground, putting yourself in the untenable position of judging the accuracy of the Bible or lack thereof and are accused of being a "Cafeteria Christian". Yvon Thivier, Sault-Sainte-Marie, Canada
If the Conservatives don't pick Ken Clarke this time, they will have made a big mistake. He is the only candidate who will be remotely inspirational or different. They must also put an end to the stupidity of trying to be more right-wing than new Labour. If they blow it this time, I don't see where they can go from here. Andrew Saul, Huntingdon
The Bible was ultimately written by men, and we are simply imperfect. Anyone who expects all truth from the Bible is forgetting that it is merely an outline of ideas and values, not a step by step guide on how to live your life. Do not seek the teachings of the wise, seek what they sought. Daniel Edwards, Florida, USA
I never thought that I would see the Roman Catholic hierarchy issue a Church document that intellectually makes more sense. It is regrettable, however, that it took centuries and countless lives before it saw the light. Now, all that religious institutions, such as the RC Church, the Church of England and the myriad other self-serving churches, need to realise is just how fundamentally unnecessary they are in a Christian's nurturing of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. R. Moores, Ottawa, Canada
It is easy for one to see why this manner of argument would eventually come from the Catholic Church. After 17 centuries they still teach and believe that Mary is still a virgin in light of scripture to the contrary. This only adds comfort to those who doubt. For persons of faith it is little consequence. William Murray, Columbia, USA
I am assuming, though I'd happily be wrong, that the passages used by Catholics to condemn gays and their relationships aren't up for interpretation? Michael Holt, London
I am unclear why the bishops have sought to "correct" the bible. The statement in the Gospels, when Pilate presented Jesus as an innocent man who he did not want to crucify, and the crowd calling out: "His blood be on us and on our children" is true. However, the Christian interpretation (held by some) that we should persecute Jews because of that statement is the part that is untrue - so the interpretation across the centuries has been incorrect, rather than that statement from the Gospel. God is our judge, not man. Jacqueline Godfrey, Chelmsford
